J.D. Vance faced one secret leak that turned his life upside down
Vice President J.D. Vance is facing his first crisis in office.
A massive betrayal forced Vance to play clean up.
And J.D. Vance faced one secret leak that turned his life upside down.
Establishment RINOs pounced on The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg’s claim that the Trump administration texted him secret war plans to smear Vice President Vance.
National Security Advisor Michael Waltz accidentally added Goldberg to a group chat among Trump administration principles discussing President Trump’s air strikes against Houthi pirates in the Red Sea.
Even though Waltz was the one who let Goldberg in the group chat, the Wall Street Journal – whose editorial board supports a blank check for war with Russia over Ukraine – attacked Vance.
The Journal’s editorial board actually praised Waltz – who let Goldberg into the chat – because Waltz supports war with Iran as well as the war in Ukraine.
Vance was the target of derision for defending President Trump’s America First foreign policy.
“The news is that the characters played to their public type. National-security adviser Mike Waltz was a voice for U.S. leadership — and for carrying out the President’s policy. Vice President JD Vance was a voice for U.S. retreat even when Mr. Trump directed otherwise,” the Journal wrote.
In the story, Goldberg shared a message from Vance where Vance argued a strike against the Houthis was once again the United States picking up the tab for Europe’s defense.
“Team, I am out for the day doing an economic event in Michigan. But I think we are making a mistake.” Vance wrote adding that “3 percent of US trade runs through the suez. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.”
Vance added that bombing the Houthis on behalf of Europe sent a mixed signal to the Europeans who President Trump is prodding to pay for a greater share of their national defense.
“I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now. There’s a further risk that we see a moderate to severe spike in oil prices. I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself. But there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc,” Vance added.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth argued the strikes were in America’s interest.
“I believe we should. This [is] not about the Houthis. I see it as two things: 1) Restoring Freedom of Navigation, a core national interest; and 2) Reestablish deterrence, which Biden cratered. But, we can easily pause. And if we do, I will do all we can to enforce 100% OPSEC”—operations security. “I welcome other thoughts,” Hegseth wrote.
Vance eventually deferred to Hegseth saying “if you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.”
The Journal tried to make it seem like Vance was undermining President Trump’s policy and that Vance was untrustworthy.
“The President’s policy carried the day,” the Journal editorial concluded. “Mr. Trump now knows which of his deputies tried to block it and which tried to carry it out.”
But as the strikes were scheduled, Vance wrote, “I will say a prayer for victory.”
The chat showed that Vance and the other Trump officials debated the matter, but once a consensus was reached on the President’s policy, Vance supported it and made it his job to sell it to the public.
